Probate & Trust Newsletter: April 2005 - Philadelphia Bar Association

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Ethics Column, continued save the case for the firm by agreeing to be screened from any participation in the matter whatsoever and to refrain from obtaining any portion of the fee resulting from the divorce case. He must still provide written notice promptly to the prospective client of the lawyerʼs intentions. Regardless of the outcome of the analysis, the lawyer would be prohibited by Rule 1.18(b) from using or revealing significantly harmful information, except as permitted by Rule 1.9, pertaining to former clients, even if he or the prospective client decided not to proceed with the representation. That duty exists no matter how brief the initial contact turned out to be. Of interest, the new Rule provides that imputation of the knowledge to others in the firm pursuant to Rule 1.10 may be avoided if the lawyer follows the three steps set forth above. If he took reasonable measures to avoid exposure to more disqualifying information than was reasonably necessary to determine whether to represent the prospective client, if all disqualified lawyers within the firm can be timely screened and kept from participating in the fee and if written notice is promptly given to the prospective client, the firm may retain the divorce case. Rule 1.0(k) sets forth the appropriate screening procedures. Perhaps the most important lesson to be learned from Rule 1.18 is the importance of obtaining as little information as possible from the prospective client before the lawyer completes the firmʼs internal conflicts check. It can take much tact and selfdiscipline, particularly in the midst of the excitement of developing a new lawyer-client relationship, to minimize the conversation and to delay for a number of days, until after the conflict check, reviving that contact. Unfortunately, though, the larger the firm, the more likely that tact and self-discipline will have to be exercised during the first contact with a prospective client. NEWSLETTER ARTICLES What would you like to see in future issues of the Probate and Trust Law Section Newsletter? The Publications Committee is looking for articles and ideas of interest to the probate bar. Please send any articles or ideas to: Robert H. Louis, Esquire Saul Ewing LLP 3800 Centre Square West Philadelphia, PA 19101 215-972-7155 e-mail: rlouis@saul.com NOTICE WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE IN FUTURE ETHICS COLUMNS? Send your questions and ideas to: Paul C. Heintz, Esquire Obermayer, Rebmann, Maxwell & Hippel, LLP 1617 JFK Boulevard One Penn Center 19th Floor Philadelphia, PA 19103 The Executive Committee of the Probate Section has approved the formation of two new Subcommittees, one on Closely Held Business Interests, chaired by Karin Kinney (215-979-3846, kkinney@mccarter.com), and one on Orphansʼ Court Litigation and Dispute Resolution, chaired by Laurence Norford (215-972- 8417, lnorford@saul.com). Anyone interested in either subcommittee should contact them. Probate and Trust Law Section Newsletter No. 111 24
2005 Probate and Trust Law Section Officers JULIA B. FISHER MARY JANE BARRETT KATHLEEN A. STEPHENSON KEVIN P. GILBOY Chair Chair-Elect Vice Chair Secretary EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE ROBERT I. FRIEDMAN DAPHNE GOLDMAN LAURENE ALLISON GUNTHER THOMAS O. HISCOTT LINDSAY C. FOSTER JOHNSON ROBERT H. LOUIS DOROTHY F. LUNTEY KATHY C. MANDELBAUM LINDA R MANFREDONIA NORA POMERANTZ JOHN F. RAIMONDI MATTHEW L. ROSIN JENNIFER L. SAFFORD DAVID R. SCHWARTZ ELIZABETH D. SHEVLIN REBECCA ROSENBERGER SMOLEN NINA B. STRYKER DAVID L. WEINREB COMMITTEE CHAIRS Closely Held Business: Communications Coordinator: Education: Public Service: Legislative: Litigation & Dispute Resolution: Outreach: Publication: Rules & Practice: Taxation: Karin M. Kinney Judith B. Stein Karen M. Stockmal M. Howard Vigderman Robert I. Friedman Lawrence C. Norford Kathy C. Mandelbaum Robert H. Louis Margaret G. Thompson Matthew L. Rosin Probate and Trust Law Section Newsletter No. 111 25
Page 1 and 2: Probate and Trust Law Section Newsl
Page 3 and 4: What Every Estates Practitioner Sho
Page 5 and 6: Pennsylvania Realty Transfer Tax, c
Page 13 and 14: New Jersey Probate Code, continued
Page 15 and 16: New Jersey Probate Code, continued
Page 17 and 18: Tax Update, continued distribution
Page 19 and 20: Tax Update, continued methods and a
Page 21 and 22: Tax Update, continued or beneficiar
Page 23: ETHICS COLUMN By PAUL C. HEINTZ OBE

Probate & Trust Newsletter: April 2005 - Philadelphia Bar Association

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?